An original and provocative study of the evolution of Shakespeare's image, building on the success of Duncan-Jones' acclaimed biography, Shakespeare: An Ungentle Life. Taking a broadly chronological approach, she investigates Shakespeare's changing reputation, as a man, an actor and a poet, both from his own viewpoint and from that of his contemporaries. Many different categories of material are explored, including printed books, manuscripts, literary and non-literary sources. Rather than a biography, the book is an exploration with biographical elements. The change in public opinion in Shakespeare's time is quite startling: Henry Chettle attacked him as an 'upstart Crow' in 1592, an attack from which Shakespeare sought to defend himself; and yet by the time of the First Folio in 1623 he had become the 'Sweet Swan of Avon!' and was fast becoming the national treasure he remains today. This engaging and fascinating study brings the politics and fashions of Shakespeare's literary and theatrical world vividly to life.

"She examines Shakespeare's reputation both from his own viewpoint and from that of his contemporaries, and considers hostile responses as well as admiring ones. Arguing that Shakespeare was a powerful actor as well as a poet throughout his career, Katherine Duncan-Jones finds testimony to his already performing as well as writing during his teenage years in Stratford. At the other end of the chronological spectrum, elegies on him between 1616 and 1623 lament his physical departure from the public stage as well as the end of his creative life"--Back cover.

A polemical attack on the ways recent Shakespeare biographers have disguised their lack of information

This compact, engaging book puts Shakespeare's originality in historical context and looks at how he worked with his sources: the plays, poems, chronicles and romances on which his own plays are based.

This book challenges the general assumption that William Shakespeare was the sole author of Hamlet. It is maintained that the plot line and the characters were drawn up by someone else. This someone is thought to have been a person of high rank, a feudal prince, in the Elizabethan society. Being a nobleman whose constant presence at Court was expected, he must have been familiar with life, gossip and intrigues of the Court. Furthermore, he had knowledge about the Danish court and Elsinore, probably imparted to him by envoys who had visited Elsinore. The scene of the play is Elsinore, but it mirrors the English court. In Elsinore is revisited we walk in the footsteps of the Queens envoys to see if we can discover how and why the site of Elsinore entered into the play and we meet men like Ramelius alias Polonius, but also Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who all entered the portrait gallery of famous characters in world literature. The purpose of Revisiting Elsinore has been to find a key to unveil the secret co-author of Hamlet. This has been done partly by a renewed reading of some primary and secondary sources, partly by discovery of an hitherto overlooked or neglected primary source.

"The Steve Jobs of the Shakespeare community… A once in a generation–or several generations–find.” –The New York Times Dennis McCarthy presents the gripping true story of Sir Thomas North, the scholar-knight who transformed the most thrilling and shocking moments of his life into plays later adapted by Shakespeare. Working from a series of manuscript discoveries that have garnered worldwide attention (including coverage in The New York Times, The Guardian, Time Magazine, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe Magazine, U.S. News, etc.), McCarthy provides numerous proofs that North wrote more than thirty plays, mostly for the Earl of Leicester’s theater troupe, years before Shakespeare reached London. Then, in the 1590s and early 1600s, Shakespeare reworked North’s plays for the public stage. Newfound proofs of North’s authorship include Shakespearean passages and scenes found in his unpublished handwritten travel journal. North wrote the diary to record his wondrous experiences in Italy—and then transformed some of his entries into elaborate set-pieces in the plays. North also used certain texts from the North family library as a playwright’s workbook, writing out marginal comments in the books to underscore the events, characters, and speeches he intended to dramatize. One of these books includes North’s entire outline of the historical plot of a Shakespeare play. Perhaps most significantly, Thomas North demonstrates that North actually lived the plays before he wrote them and that even many of the most iconic scenes in the canon derive from striking events that North actually experienced. The book also reveals for the first time North’s historical involvement in the Essex Rebellion and why neither he nor Shakespeare was punished for the treasonous play, Richard II. Thomas North also examines many hundreds of lines and passages that have been taken from North’s published prose translations and recycled in Shakespeare’s plays, most of which are unique, occurring nowhere else in the history of English literature. As the book confirms, no one has borrowed more from an earlier writer than Shakespeare has from North, and it is not even close. Finally, Thomas North includes documentation indicating North was a playwright for Leicester’s Men and explains why so many playwrights of the era (like North) never published their plays. It also shows how, to meet increasing public demand, the commercial theater companies began to revive plays previously performed at court, private manors, and universities. As part of this London-wide pattern of revivals, Shakespeare purchased and reworked North’s old dramas, resulting in the most celebrated works of literature in English history. In truth, scholars have always known that Shakespeare frequently adapted old plays. They just never knew who had written them. With Thomas North, the mysteries that have plagued Shakespeare studies for centuries now finally have an answer.

Shakespeare on Record is a unique guide to major Shakespeare discoveries and the archival insight that made them possible. With contributions from experts at The National Archives, the Folger Shakespeare Library and leading universities, the book explores and explains the bureaucratic processes and governmental practices that shaped life and records in Renaissance England – making it a key resource for both Shakespeare scholars and researchers of early modern lives. Chapters examine key documents concerning property, the law, coats of arms and investments, which relate to Shakespeare's lives in both Stratford and London. Several of The National Archives' collection of over 120 documents which illuminate Shakespeare's life are profiled here for the first time. Richly illustrated throughout, this is a key resource for both Shakespeare scholars and researchers of early modern lives.

A comprehensive study of Shakespeare's forgotten masterpiece The Phoenix and Turtle . Bednarz confronts the question of why one of the greatest poems in the English language is customarily ignored or misconstrued by Shakespeare biographers, literary historians, and critics.

Considering both Shakespeare's fellow writers as well as members of his acting company Shakespeare in Company offers a unique insight into the company kept by William Shakespeare and how it impacted on his writing.

The academic community treats the chronology of Shakespeare’s works as settled. He supposedly served an apprenticeship collaborating on plays in the 1580s, wrote two great poems in the early 90s, three plays a year from the mid-90s, some problem plays around the turn of the century, then his greatest tragedies, and finally some “romances” late in his career. This investigation highlights the flaws in the consensus view: over-reliance on precarious stylometrics, dubious identification of topical relevance, and unfounded conviction that composition preceded publication, performance, or first mention by only a short interval. Concentrating on his poems and six of his plays, the study ascribes parallels in others’ literary works to their authors’ imitation or parodying of Shakespeare, not vice versa. The importance of patronage circles rather than London theatre companies to writers, players, and printers is spelled out. The conclusion is that Shakespeare’s works must be radically antedated.